This is my first venture into the deep and mystifying world into economics. I hope to receive advice in this area.

So, as my clickbait title implied, this will be about the economics when robots make up a majority of the workforce. Many have been scared that their jobs will be replaced with cheaper robot counterparts. It seems that robots will destroy our economy and threaten our survival, even though Skyney does not exist (another distinct possibility, though not relevant to our discussion) . But what if instead of capitalism as our future economic system, we replace it with communism?

I am a firm believer that communism could never work as long as human emotions are factor. However, in this scenario, robots, programmed never to disobey, would do our work. Competition would not be needed for our wealth. Presumably, we would have a surplus of resources. It seems that communism would be the easiest way to distribute these resources.

My only problem is that this would lead to an overpowered government. Perhaps this could be resolved by the fact that the officials would be too concerned with their own wealth to want to turn this into a tyranny.

At 4/20/2016 3:11:09 PM, Rami wrote:This is my first venture into the deep and mystifying world into economics. I hope to receive advice in this area.

We welcome you, apprentice.

So, as my clickbait title implied, this will be about the economics when robots make up a majority of the workforce. Many have been scared that their jobs will be replaced with cheaper robot counterparts. It seems that robots will destroy our economy and threaten our survival, even though Skyney does not exist (another distinct possibility, though not relevant to our discussion) . But what if instead of capitalism as our future economic system, we replace it with communism?

I really suggest you read the OP in this thread: [http://www.debate.org...]It's one of my creations, and reflects my view on this. It's more economics and less political (insofar as capitalism and communism are political), but I put it in the politics forum to attract more attention (an attempt that miserably failed). However, I do try to bring up nonpartisan, logical points. It's very relevant to your OP.

I am a firm believer that communism could never work as long as human emotions are factor. However, in this scenario, robots, programmed never to disobey, would do our work. Competition would not be needed for our wealth. Presumably, we would have a surplus of resources. It seems that communism would be the easiest way to distribute these resources.

I would agree communism concedes individual quality of life and forfeits human emotions. In the above scenario, your conclusion presupposes an increase in technological labor and artificial intelligence inherently removes individual rights alone. I don't believe this is the case. Theoretically speaking, if we were to increase such forms of AI, we would just have a more technologically focused economy. That alone does not account for individual rights. That said, under your conviction, communism still would not be plausible. Sure, we might have a surplus, but why would communism be any better than capitalism? If robotics are so widespread and available, would they not be used on an individual level as well? And if automation is prevalent, it would drive prices down. This would parallel quality of life alongside economic surplus.

My only problem is that this would lead to an overpowered government. Perhaps this could be resolved by the fact that the officials would be too concerned with their own wealth to want to turn this into a tyranny.

Agreed. Big, centralized government undermines economic growth and stimulation, especially on an individual level. Prosperity of the individual works best under a capitalist society. Hitler's fascist policies led to low unemployment, but came at the severe cost of individual rights, quality of life, and general well-being. Likewise, communism under any pretense (robotics included) does not protect the individual as long as they still exist.

"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW